Creation

'Atheists' are a general grouping, not a specific one.

• Many have no opinion on the subject, and allow expert opinions to weigh the matter on their behalf.
• Some refuse the admission of creationism in public education as science (although private education may do what it pleases) because it is inherently unscientific and in many places, illegal to do so. Evolution is accepted because of its scientific support.
• Others make acceptance for creationism taught in religious classes, which is fair enough.

According to the Bible, God always was. Which means he never had a beginning, OR an end, he just was. If you believe in God, you dont believe in evolution. We believe in adaptation, but not evolution. And if you believe in evolution, you dont generally believe in Jesus. Therefore, i believe that God came first.

ANSWER:

The answer can vary depending on exactly how you are using the terms "Jesus" and "evolution".

If by "Jesus" you mean the Son of God then, since He is eternal with the Father and the Holy Spirit, Jesus came first.

If by Jesus you mean the man Jesus of Nazareth whom the Son became and by evolution you mean the process by which life developed, then evolution came first.

If you mean Jesus the man and evolution the theory developed by Charles Darwin then, since Jesus lived over eighteen hundred years before Darwin, Jesus came first.

Kent Hovind is a self-described "Creation Scientist."

An ultra-conservative Christian and former science teacher, he lectures on his beliefs of Creationism as well as the Hovind Theory, which entails everything from the story of how we got here to what made the mountains and oceans and where did the dinosaurs go?

Due to tax fraud, Kent Hovind was brought to court many times. After lying several times under oath, the jury found him guilty on all 55 charges brought against him and he was sentenced to 10 years in prison, as well as various fines. His wife was sentenced to one year in prison and more fines.

He has a website: http://www.drdino.com/

And is on Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kent_Hovind

Religious responses to the science of evolution are varied. The Dalai Lama has said that just as Buddhism searches for the truth, so does science, and if Buddhism needs to adapt to new scientific theories then it will. At the other extreme, biblical literalists continue to teach that the world is too young for evolution to have occurred. Although the Christian Churches were almost unanimous in condemning Darwin's Theory, this has since changed and some of the modern Christian responses include:

• The Catholic Church has now reacted favourably. Pope Pius XII stated in his encyclical Humani Generis (1950) that there was no opposition between evolution and the doctrine of the faith and that he considered the doctrine of "evolutionism" a serious hypothesis, worthy of investigation and in-depth study equal to that of the opposing hypothesis; Pope John Paul II, in an address to the Pontifical Academy of Sciences (1996), said that new knowledge has led to the recognition of the theory of evolution as more than a hypothesis; Pope Benedict has refused to endorse "intelligent design" theories, instead backing "theistic evolution" which considers that God created life through evolution with no clash between religion and science.
• The Episcopal Church has said that the theory of evolution does not conflict with Christian faith. In 2006, the General Convention affirmed, via Resolution A129, that God is creator and added that "the theory of evolution provides a fruitful and unifying scientific explanation for the emergence of life on earth, that many theological interpretations of origins can readily embrace an evolutionary outlook, and that an acceptance of evolution is entirely compatible with an authentic and living Christian faith." The Church encourages the teaching of evolution in schools.
• The Church of England is considering the possibility of apologising posthumously to Darwin, for its earlier condemnation of his theory

Creation

Evolution

Cause

God was the Cause

For every effect, there is a cause (observable)

There was not cause - 15 billion years ago for no know reason, the universe exploded itself into existence. Time, chance, and natural process created all things.

The creation of the universe is an effect with no cause (not observable).

Origin

The universe was spoken into existence by God's Word.

Matter cannot be created or destroyed by natural processes (observable).

Began with 'singularity', a tiny infinitely hot and dense point

Matter was created by a natural process (not observable).

Energy

We are devolving

Energy goes from a state of usable energy to less usable energy (observable).

We are evolving

Energy goes from a state of less usable energy to more usable energy (not observable).

Space

Earth created first (day 1)

Stars came afterwards (day 4) with the sun and moon.

Stars formed first

Earth formed afterwards

Earths

Covering

Water

Fire

Time Constraints

6 Days - The creation of the World was FINISHED in six day and is no longer taking place (observable).

Infinite Time - 4.6 billion years ago the earth evolved by natural processes. The world is in a continuous process of creation evolution (not observable).

Quality

Very Good

Primitive, Violent

Planning of

Life

By design

Accident

Origin of

Life

God

Life comes from life (observable), no known exceptions.

Forces of Nature

It is possible for life to come from non-life (not observable).

Time needed

for Life

2 Days (Faith based) - all animal/human life was created on day 5 and 6.

Millions of years (Faith based) - They don't know how it happened but given enough time they BELIEVE it will.

Species

Kind begets kind (observable).

Kind begets some other kind (not observable).

Animal Life

Birds first, then

Reptiles

Reptiles first, then

Birds

Human Life

Man was created on day six

Man is made in the image of God.

3.5 billion years ago life evolved

Humans evolved from ape-like creatures.

Beginning

of Death

After Adam sinned, not a process of creation - it is a product of man's sin.

Always been present, part of the creation process - the means by which man evolves into a higher being.

Cause of

Death

Sin, there was no death before Adam sinned (plant life not included), the breath of life was breathed into animals but not plants.

Natural process, existed from the beginning of life

Spiritual

Death

Both physical and spiritual, you will give an account of your life after you die.

Physical only, no accountability after death.

Sediment Layers,

Canyons

Form rapidly (liquefaction). Witnessed during Mt. St. Helen (observable).

Form slowly. No evidence witnessed (not observable).

Fossil Creation

Catastrophic event, rapid burial in water, (observable).

Buried by dust over long periods of time (not observable).

Marine fossils on

Mountains

Global flood, Genesis account

Rapid 40 day/night event

Springs of the deep broken up

All creation perished

All mountains covered by at least 20 ft.

About 200 legends from cultures all over the world.

Local floods, earth sinking into the ocean and rising again.

No written record or legend

Trees through

layers

Fossilized trees spanning many layers indicates rapid burial by water, observable with Mt. St. Helen. Can be created in one week (observable).

Over many years plant life died, sank into the earth, and coal formed (not observable).

Coal, Oil,

Petrified

Wood

Coal, Oil, Petrified Wood, can all be made in a matter of weeks, (observable).

Coal, Oil, Petrified Wood take millions of years to form (not observable).

Biblical Day

Recognize that the Biblical day means 24 hours and accept it as fact

Hebrew word "Yom", in all cases, means short period of time

defined to be evening and morning

days are distinguished between seasons and years (Genesis 1:14)

God's own word (Exodus 10:11)

writing style of Genesis is narrative, not poetic

genealogy of human race given

Some, recognize that the Biblical day means 24 hours but reject the account as a myth.

Others, interpret the Biblical definition of day to mean millions of years.

Creationism is usually associated with a belief that the world was created only a few thousand years ago, much as it is today, and that evolution played no part. This belief is not universally held by all Christians.
Many Christians, while believing that God created the universe at some stage in the past, do accept that the world is billions of years old and that evolution resulted in the development of all living things. Even the Catholic Church has moved towards this position:

• Pope Pius XII stated in his encyclical Humani Generis (1950) that there was no opposition between evolution and the doctrine of the faith and that he considered the doctrine of "evolutionism" a serious hypothesis, worthy of investigation and in-depth study equal to that of the opposing hypothesis;
• Pope John Paul II, in an address to the Pontifical Academy of Sciences (1996), said that new knowledge has led to the recognition of the theory of evolution as more than a hypothesis;
• Pope Benedict has refused to endorse "intelligent design" theories, instead backing "theistic evolution" which considers that God created life through evolution with no clash between religion and science.
  

For more information, please visit: http://christianity.answers.com/theology/the-story-of-creation

• 15 Jesus is risen

Background to 'The Stations of The Cross"According to the Christian Tradition, after Jesus was condemned to death by crucifixion, he was ordered to carry his cross on his back to the site of crucifixions, at Golgotha, otherwise known as Calvary, situated outside the walls of the 2nd Temple City of Jerusalem.
All four Gospels tell of the trial before the High Priest and his being led to Pontius Pilate who, as Roman Governor had sole rights in law for Capital punishment. They describe the events between his being brought to the Praetorium (House of Roman Government) and his crucifixion at Golgotha.
The Roman Catholic church divided the route into its current 14 "Stations of The Cross".
Throughout Christian history, there have been traditions regarding the route to the crucifixion and the events that surrounded it, however, from the 14th Century the tradition has been more concrete on the ground, fixing events to known points of the current Old City of Jerusalem, called the "Route of Christ's Torment", or in Latin, The Via Dolorosa.
The route is strewn with chapels and small churches for its entire length, culminating in the Church of The Holy Sepulchre (tomb) at Golgotha, the site of Crucifixion, death, burial and Resurrection.
Each station describes a specific event deemed significant en the route of "suffering and torment".
Many parishes in Europe held similar Easter traditions of re-enacting the final route of Jesus, and as a natural result of this, the stations in Jerusalem were established primarily as a necessary answer to the needs of pilgrims, seeking to tread in the footsteps of their Lord on his final route.
The development of the route, tying events described in Gospel to actual sites and subsequent construction of the chapels and churches on these sites (stations) has been overseen by the Franciscan Order. Since the expulsion of the Crusaders from the Holy Land, this Order has had an exclusive mandate from the Pope to oversee the safekeeping and development of all Holy Sites in the Holy Land. The order was basically responsible for pioneering the return of Christian pilgrims to the Holy Land from the 14th Century onwards.
Only 3 out of the 14 stations signify events actually mentioned in Gospel, the additional 11 stations are the result of legend and tradition, but developed in order to deepen and dramatize, adding spiritual and emotional depth to the Pilgrims' experience, with emphasis on the suffering, by treading the route.
Most noteworthy of these examples is the 4th Station, where a cross-bearing Jesus meets his mother. It is noteworthy that whilst Christian scripture in John 19:25 mentions Mary's presence at the crucifixion, there is no mention whatever of her presence on the "Route of Torments" prior to this, but has been marked out as a development of the scripture story by the Franciscans.
The rationale behind this is simple, as the role or "greatness" of Mary is not much lower in Catholic tradition, that that of the Son of God Himself, signified for example, in her ascendance to heaven, something worthy only of Jesus and Elijah.
A further example is the story of the 6th Station. Here, Veronika, a 'maiden of Jerusalem', taking pity on the perspiring, suffering Jesus as he strains to carry His Cross towards the hill of Calvary, steps forward and wipes His sweat-covered face with a handkerchief, leaving an imprint of his complete face in the material.
Her name is a direct extrapolation of the event - Vera Icona - meaning "true image" in Latin.
Whilst it is true that the event at this point is absent from Scripture, it can be seen as a development of a mention in Luke 23:27-30, which describes Jesus conversing with the maidens of Jerusalem, who wail and lament as they join the masses following His route, developing into a procession. It is not impossible to then interpret from this mention, that one such girl, taking pity on His pain, decided to do her part to ease it by wiping His brow or His face.
The remaining Stations of the Cross all relate to events specifically mentioned in the gospels as having taken place on that journey.
For example, the 5th Station, where Simon of Cyrenia has to step in and participate in the efforts of Jesus in carrying the Cross.
To summarise the sources of the positioning of the stations, the whereabouts of the beginning and end of the route had to be taken as a given consensus:
v Pontius Pilatus was the Roman Governor of Jerusalem, who lived in Caesarea, which was the Roman administrative centre for Judea. His presence in Jerusalem is easily explained, as the events leading up to the betrayal and subsequent trials and crucifixion take place in the days leading up to the Passover, one of the 3 main "Foot", or Pilgrimage festivals for the Jews. For such a festival, Jerusalem would be inundated with tens to hundreds of thousands of Jewish pilgrims, who would journey to observe the Temple rituals surrounding the festival.
v In order to 'keep tags' on sources of political trouble or disturbances, it would be prudent for the Governor, accompanied by a military force, to take up residence in the Jewish city at such times.
v Caesarea was a mixed pagan-Jewish-Samaritan city, one where a Roman governor, with his own pagan temples and Roman city life, would feel more at home and significantly, safer.
An obvious place to take up residence and establish his government Praetorium for times like this, when the Governor was resident in the city, would be the huge Fortress of Antonia, which King Herod "the Great" had built for the exact purposes of:
- protection of the Temple Mount it was adjacent to;
- positioning on the (then) outer northern walls providing access routes independent of the city streets; and
- as a safe refuge in the event of an insurrection.
v The positioning of the Antonia fortress is a known factor, much of its foundations remained at surface level well into the Middle Ages and would have been either visible, or distinctly known to be at the North West corner of the Temple Mount.
v The final point on the Route of tribulations of Jesus, being the site of Crucifixion and close-by burial is the Golgotha (Calvary), which is situated outside the walls of the 2nd Temple City, as is necessitated by Jewish Law, by which the city was governed, which proscribes emphatically either execution or burial of the dead within the confines of the City Walls. It is also a burial site, as can be seen by an intact 2nd Temple catacomb aside one of the crypts in the Holy Sepulchre Church, traditiinally credited to being the tomb of Joseph of Arimathea.
Upon this basis of two sites seen as unequivocally proven, the Franciscans constructed their route, a route designed to commemorate the events, from the trial, to the conviction, leaving the Praetorium, taking a cross on which to be crucified, carrying it to the site of crucifixion, death on the cross, burial and rising from the dead - all among the most significant and defining events in Christianity.

1. Mount of Olives
2. Gethsemane
3. Peter in Gallicantu
4. The Citadel (Jaffa Gate)
5. And from there to the Holy Sepulchre

Muslims believe in the creation as stated in Quran, Muslims holy book. The creation story as mentioned in Quran is credible to many scientists, Muslims and non-Muslims, especially that the correctness and validity of lots of scientific satements that are mentioned in Quran in the seventh century had been proven by the current scientific and technological capacities.

The following are some relevat quotes from Quran on the universe Creation:

"9.Say: Disbelieve ye verily in Him Who created the earth in two Days, and ascribe ye unto Him rivals ? He (and none else) is the Lord of the Worlds. 10. He placed therein firm hills rising above it, and blessed it and measured therein its sustenance in four Days (that is the sum of 2 days for earth, and two for hills and substances), alike for (all) who ask;11. Then turned He to the heaven when it was smoke, and said unto it and unto the earth: Come both of you, willingly or loth. They said: We come, obedient. 12. Then He ordained them seven heavens in two Days and inspired in each heaven its mandate; and We decked the nether heaven with lamps, and rendered it inviolable. That is the measuring of the Mighty, the Knower."

"30.Have not those who disbelieve known that the heavens and the earth were of one piece, then We parted them, and we made every living thing of water ? Will they not then believe ?"

"29. He it is Who created for you all that is in the earth. Then turned He to the heaven, and fashioned it as seven heavens. And He is knower of all things. 30. And when thy Lord said unto the angels: Lo! I am about to place a viceroy in the earth, they said: Wilt thou place therein one who will do harm therein and will shed blood, while we, we hymn Thy praise and sanctify Thee ? He said: Surely I know that which ye know not."

[Quoted from: The Meanings of the Glorious Quran, Translated into the English, Language by Marmaduke Pickthall]

Accordingly, man was the last thing created, after completion of creation of whole universe.

Answer: There are a number of possible consequences of teaching creationism. The context and manner in which it is taught could also play a significant part in the consequences. Some of the possible options are set out below.

1. Students gain a greater understanding of what creationism actually is and what it isn't.

2. Students gain a deeper understanding of the basis of true science and of the scientific method.

3. Students gain knowledge of the creationist assumptions behind many great scientists of both the past and the present day.

4. Students come to understand how creationist belief has never stifled true science (contrary to much propaganda) but actually encouraged it.

5. Students become aware of how evolutionary belief (the main alternative belief to creationism) has stifled science in a number of key areas .e;g; belief in vestigial organs and junk DNA.

6. Students come to understand the part that beliefs or presuppositions play in science.

7. Students discover some or much of the scientific evidences that support creationist arguments.

8. Students learn to think for themselves and learn to evaluate and reason logically from evidence to reach valid conclusions.

9. Students gain an interest in creationist research and develope an ambition to conduct research of their own.

Many creationists of course understand that teaching creationism, if done by a person either ignorant or opposed to it could have an entirely negative impact and for this reason they are not in favor of it being taught in the public school classroom.

None. The inclusion of creationism into the educational curriculum has created the incorrect perception that creationism is a science-based theory which is "just as valid" as evolutionism.

However, evolutionism has solid theories that explain the entire evolution of the human species from the very beginning of life on Earth, backed up by independent research, subjected to open peer review.

Creationism on the other hand has no substantiated evidence that would be accepted outside of its "selective" peer review - i.e. creationist "evidence" is only validated by supporters of creationism. Furthermore, creationism does not explain the origin of the universe or the evolutionary footprints in our DNA with anything more than "God did it".

In the scientific method, a theory has to withstand research, objective observation and peer review before it deemed worthy the title of theory. Theories can have strong opposition during their development within the scientific community, but in the end, if a theory fits all the facts, it will be accepted even by its strongest opponents if they adhere to the scientific method (as was the case with Darwin's theory of evolution).

Since neither independent research, independent observations or open peer review have been possible or permitted on the statements of creationism, most scientists regard it as pseudo-science and therefore unworthy of being included in the educational curriculum of democratic nations where religion (a private practice) and education (a public service) are supposed to be separated by the very foundations of their constitutions.

Creationism is not science, and to teach it in science classes would be misleading. For more information, please visit: http://christianity.answers.com/theology/the-story-of-creation

There are two questions here, one explicit and one implicit:

The first addresses whether the concept of creationism should be taught in public schools in some class.

The second concerns whether or not creationism should be taught in a science class.

The answer to either has NOTHING to do with the theory of evolution.

Let's address the second question first, because it's the easiest to answer.

Creationism absolutely should never be taught in a science class. The reason has nothing to do with the subject matter; it has to do with Creationism not being a scientific theory. In order for an idea to be science (and consequently, have a scientific theory constructed around it), it must follow certain rules: there must be experimentally verifiable assertions made, and the theory as a whole must be constructed using these (testable) assertions combined with the reproducible experimental data. That is, science consists of making an assertion that can be proven FALSE, and then making a sufficient amount of tests to either prove that assertion false, or increase the confidence that the assertion is true (as a scientific theory is based on a preponderance of evidence, and cannot be shown "true" in the same way a mathematical proof can be).

Creationism cannot produce these testable conditions. There is no test that can be run to show whether there is a God (or Intelligent Designer) or not - that is, Creationism is rooted in faith (a form of, by definition, baseless belief), which cannot be used in science. Thus, Creationism is a form of faith/religion, not a scientific theory, and cannot be taught in a science class. You can't teach Philosophy in Science class.

The first (explicit) interpretation of the question is more tricky, as it concerns the content of Creationism as a belief system. Creationism is inherently a Christian faith system; while it is possible to structure Creationism as some form of general monotheistic belief, the literature and supporting movements of the system are derived (and almost exclusively practiced) by those of a Christian faith.

As a form of religious faith, teaching such a subject in a public school - which has a duty as a government-sponsored institution not to promote one religion over others - can be tricky.

Legally speaking, it is possible to teach Creationism in a class where the context is sociology and/or philosophy, and where the discussion and study is not "accept this as true", but more "analyze what this says and why, and look at the roots of where it came from." It would NOT be possible to teach this in any way which endorsed Creationism as "truth" or which judged people according to their adherence to its tenants, because in both situations, it would be the school (aka government) promoting the views of a specific religion over those of others not of that religion.

Thus, it could be entirely appropriate to discuss Creationism in a Comparative Religions class, or Western Philosophy class, or even a Sociology class. It might even be possible to be taught to younger kids in a Social Studies class. That is, you could "teach" Creationism in the same way you would "teach" Shakespeare or Ayn Rand. The prime point is that Creationism cannot be presented as accepted fact, or as supported by fact.

Whether or not it would be beneficial to students that such a subject be taught is left up to your local community to decide.